Give farm bill a fresh start
Wisconsin State Journal, November 9, 2007

What may be the last chance for Congress to use the 2007 federal farm bill to reform outdated farm policy emerged this week.

The Senate should seize the opportunity to gear American agriculture to a new era shaped by the global economy, growing demand for biofuels, an urgent need for conservation and an imperative to rein in federal spending.

Wisconsin Sens. Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold should help lead the charge.

At stake is the legislation that for the next five years will govern agriculture -- a $28.6 billion-a-year industry in Wisconsin.

The opportunity was created by two events. First, a bloated, same-old-same-old farm bill loaded with wasteful subsidies bogged down in the Senate in the face of a threatened presidential veto.

Second, two champions of reform, Sens. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., introduced legislation to end subsidies, boost conservation and biofuel research and spread aid more evenly across agriculture.

Those were also the themes of a reform plan championed in the House by Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis.

Kind and Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., got more than 100 co-sponsors for the House reform. But they were overwhelmed by backers of a plan to keep agriculture in the same old furrow of dependence on subsidies, at a staggering cost of $286 billion over five years.

The subsidies are self-defeating because they encourage overproduction, which depresses prices, which in turn triggers more subsidies.

Subsidies also harm U.S. farmers when they try to sell in foreign markets. Many subsidies violate international trade rules. In addition, foreign nations reciprocate by raising tariffs and other barriers to U.S. products.

The Lugar-Lautenberg plan is called the Farm Ranch Equity Stewardship and Health Act, or FRESH for short.

The plan would end subsidies but still offer farmers a safety net to cushion steep price declines. The centerpiece of that safety net would be an expanded crop insurance program to cover losses due to bad weather or price collapse.

The shift would save up to $16 billion, which would be invested in conservation programs and biofuels research.

The result would be a farm bill that spreads assistance to more than just the major crop farmers who have been cashing in on the subsidies.

The time for reform is right. Agriculture has entered a new age. Farmers should be freed to take advantage of new opportunities in markets at home and abroad. They should produce to meet consumer demand, not to collect government checks.

Adopting farm policy reform will require the courage to stand up to powerful interests vested in the status quo of subsidies. Wisconsin should call upon Kohl and Feingold to summon that courage.